Enhanced passive safety surveillance of high-dose and standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated split-virion influenza vaccines in Germany and Finland during the 2022/23 influenza season.

Enhanced Passive Safety Surveillance (EPSS) was conducted for quadrivalent inactivated split-virion influenza vaccines (IIV4) in Germany (high dose [HD]) and Finland (standard dose [SD]) for the northern hemisphere (NH) 2022/23 influenza season. The primary objective was to assess adverse events following immunization (AEFI) occurring ≤7 days post-vaccination. In each country, the EPSS was conducted at the beginning of the NH influenza season. Exposure information was documented using vaccination cards (VC), and AEFI were reported via an electronic data collection system or telephone. AEFI were assessed by seriousness and age group (Finland only). The vaccinee reporting rate (RR) was calculated as the number of vaccinees reporting ≥ 1 AEFI divided by the total vaccinees. In Germany, among 1041 vaccinees, there were 31 AEFI (ten vaccinees) during follow-up, including one serious AEFI. Of 16 AEFI (six vaccinees) with reported time of onset, 15 occurred ≤7 days post-vaccination (RR 0.58%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21, 1.25), which was lower than the 2021/22 season (RR 1.88%, 95% CI: 1.10, 3.00). In Finland, among 1001 vaccinees, there were 142 AEFI (51 vaccinees) during follow-up, none of which were serious. Of 133 AEFI (48 vaccinees) with time of onset reported, all occurred ≤7 days post-vaccination (RR 4.80%, 95% CI: 3.56, 6.31), which was similar to the 2021/22 season (RR 4.90%, 95% CI: 3.65, 6.43). The EPSS for HD-IIV4 and for SD-IIV4 in the 2022/23 influenza season did not suggest any clinically relevant changes in safety beyond what is known/expected for IIV4s.

Relative effectiveness of influenza vaccines in elderly persons in the United States, 2012/2013-2017/2018 seasons.

Influenza immunization protects seniors against influenza and its potentially serious complications. It is uncertain whether standard-dose (SD) quadrivalent vaccine offers better protection over other formulations in the elderly. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of SD-trivalent, high-dose (HD) trivalent, SD-quadrivalent, and adjuvanted trivalent vaccines in seniors (≥65 years) in a real-world setting. We selected over 200,000 individuals in each of 6 influenza seasons from 2012 to 2018 using MarketScan® databases. The two outcomes were hospitalization or emergency room (ER) visit due to (1) influenza or (2) pneumonia. Here, SD-quadrivalent was associated with higher risk of influenza-related hospitalization/ER visit (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.14 and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.05-1.24) and of pneumonia-related hospitalization/ER visit (aHR 1.04 and 95% CI 1.01-1.07) vs. HD-trivalent. SD-trivalent followed similar trends compared to HD-trivalent (aHR 1.16 and 95% CI 1.06-1.27 for hospitalized/ER visit influenza; aHR 1.07 and 95% CI 1.05-1.10 for hospitalized/ER visit pneumonia). We could not demonstrate risk differences between SD vaccine formulations and between adjuvanted trivalent and one of the other three vaccines. Risk estimates slightly varied across seasons. These findings suggest that SD vaccine formulations vs. HD-trivalent were associated with higher risk of hospitalization/ER visit for influenza and pneumonia in seniors.

Real-world analyses of therapy discontinuation of checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic melanoma patients.

The 'real-world' patient population of metastatic melanoma is not fully represented in clinical trials investigating checkpoint inhibitors. We described therapy discontinuation in an unselected population-based cohort of adults with metastatic melanoma who started therapy with pembrolizumab, nivolumab, or nivolumab/ipilimumab from January 2015 to August 2017. Therapy discontinuation was defined as a gap between doses beyond 120 days, and/or initiation of another cancer therapy. We estimated drug-specific rate ratios for therapy discontinuation adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, health care use, and past cancer therapies. We included 876 metastatic melanoma patients initiating pembrolizumab (44.3%), nivolumab/ipilimumab (31.2%), and nivolumab (24.5%). At 12 months of follow-up, the probabilities of therapy discontinuation were 49.9% (95% confidence interval, CI 43.6-56.5) for pembrolizumab, 58.8% (95% CI 50.5-67.3) for nivolumab, and 59.2% (95% CI 51.7-66.8) for nivolumab/ipilimumab. Stratified analyses based on prior cancer therapy, brain metastases at baseline, and sex showed similar trends. In multivariable analyses, compared with pembrolizumab, patients starting nivolumab (rate ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.08-1.77) or nivolumab/ipilimumab (rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.02-1.65) were more likely to discontinue therapy. Our findings indicate frequent discontinuations of checkpoint inhibitors at one year. The lower discontinuation associated with pembrolizumab should be confirmed in further studies.

Effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is the first oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), and non-TNF biologics in patients with RA previously treated with methotrexate. METHODS: We used MarketScan® databases (2011-2014) to study methotrexate-exposed patients with RA who were newly prescribed tofacitinib, DMARDs other than methotrexate, and biologics. The date of first prescription was defined as the cohort entry. The therapy was considered effective if all of the following criteria from a claims-based algorithm were achieved at the first year of follow-up: high adherence, no biologic or tofacitinib switch or addition, no DMARD switch or addition, no increase in dose or frequency of index drug, no more than one glucocorticoid joint injection, and no new/increased oral glucocorticoid dose. The safety outcome was serious infections requiring hospitalization. Non-TNF biologics comprised the reference group. RESULTS: We included 21,832 patients with RA, including 0.8% treated with tofacitinib, 24.7% treated with other DMARDs, 61.2% who had started therapy with TNFi, and 13.3% treated with non-TNF biologics. The rates of therapy effectiveness were 15.4% for tofacitinib, 11.1% for DMARDs, 18.6% for TNFi, and 19.8% for non-TNF biologics. In adjusted analyses, tofacitinib and non-TNF biologics appeared to have similar effectiveness rates, whereas DMARD initiators were less effective than non-TNF biologics. We could not clearly establish if tofacitinib was associated with a higher rate of serious infections. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RA previously treated with methotrexate, our comparisons of tofacitinib with non-TNF biologics, though not definitive, did not demonstrate differences with respect to hospitalized infections or effectiveness.

Comparative effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs in nondiabetic patients with hypertension: A population-based study.

The authors compared the effectiveness of thiazide diuretic (TD), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), and calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapies for the treatment of nondiabetic hypertension using MarketScan Databases 2010-2014. Multivariable Cox regression models assessed whether the addition of a new antihypertensive drug, treatment discontinuation, or switch and major cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events varied across groups. A total of 565 009 patients started monotherapy with ACEIs (43.6%), CCBs (23.6%), TDs (18.8%), or ARBs (14.0%). Patients who took TDs had a higher risk for either drug addition or discontinuation than patients who took ACEIs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.68-0.70] vs HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.80-0.81]), ARBs (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.66-0.68] vs HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.65-0.67]), and CCBs (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.84-0.87] vs HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.95]). Conversely, patients who took TDs experienced a lower risk of clinical events compared with patients who took ACEIs (HR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.15-1.33]), ARBs (HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.18-1.39]), and CCBs (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.25-1.46]). Our results provide a strong rationale for choosing TDs as first-line monotherapy for the control of hypertension.

Real Life Experience of First Course of Anti-TNF Treatment in Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: In Brazil, patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have access to free-of-charge comprehensive therapeutic care through the Brazilian National Health System. We collected prospective data on patients with AS receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy through the Brazilian National Health System in Belo Horizonte City in order to evaluate the effectiveness, quality-of-life outcomes and safety of this therapy. METHODS: This was a prospective study that included 87 patients receiving their first course of anti-TNF agents (adalimumab, etanercept or infliximab). The effectiveness of treatment was assessed at 6 and 12 months of follow-up using measures of disease activity [Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)], function [Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)] and quality of life (EuroQol-5D). Good clinical response was defined as an improvement of at least 50% or 2 units in the BASDAI. Episodes of adverse events were recorded. Logistic regression was performed, and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated to estimate predictors of good clinical response at 6 months. RESULTS: At 6 months of follow-up, 64.9% of patients had a good clinical response, as evidenced by a drop in the median BASDAI score from 5.21 to 2.50 (p < 0.0001) and a reduction in the HAQ score from 1.13 to 0.38 (p < 0.0001). Patients also showed an improvement in health-related quality of life which was sustained after 12 months of follow-up. Female patients achieved a significantly lower clinical response than male patients (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11-0.78), but we observed no significant associations between the other variables. At the end of the study, 93 non-serious adverse events had been reported. CONCLUSION: Treatment with the anti-TNF drugs adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab is effective and well tolerated in patients with AS. The improvement in disease activity, functional parameters and quality of life was sustained for 12 months.

Costs of Drug Therapy in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: The Brazilian Public Health System offers free-of-charge drug treatment for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) to all Brazilian citizens. We report here the first population-based cohort study on patients with AS in Brazil. The aim of this study was to evaluate the costs of the tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) blockers and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that were used in the treatments of patients with AS in Brazil between March 2010 and September 2013. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using administrative databases. All patients with a diagnosis of AS who were aged 18 years or older and had been dispensed anti-TNF or DMARDs were included in the analysis. The cost analysis was carried out from the health system perspective, and the results were described as median monthly cost per capita and the annual cost over the study period. RESULTS: A search of the databases identified 1251 patients with AS who were treated during the study period, of whom 63.3% were male; the median age was 41 years. During the study period, 78.0% of patients initiated treatment with anti-TNF drugs and 22.0% with DMARDs. The median monthly cost per capita was US$ 1650 for anti-TNF therapy and US$ 25 for treatment with DMARDs. Among the anti-TNF drugs, therapy with etanercept was associated with the lowest cost per patient, followed by adalimumab and infliximab. No difference in monthly cost was observed in relation to gender and age. CONCLUSION: The cost per patient of treating AS in this study cohort was lower with etanercept than with adalimumab and infliximab. These results highlights the economic burden of treating patients with AS.

Treatment persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate treatment persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis who started therapies with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and tumor necrosis factor blockers (anti-TNF drugs). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study from July 2008 to September 2013 evaluated therapy persistence, which is defined as the period between the start of treatment until it is discontinued, allowing for an interval of up to 30 days between the prescription end and the start of the next prescription. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated by logistic regression models to estimate the patients' chances of persisting in their therapies after the first and after the two first years of follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 11,642 patients with rheumatoid arthritis - 2,241 of these started on anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 9,401 patients started on DMARD - and 1,251 patients with ankylosing spondylitis - 976 of them were started on anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 275 were started on DMARD. In the first year of follow-up, 63.5% of the patients persisted in their therapies with anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 54.1% remained using DMARD in the group with rheumatoid arthritis. In regards to ankylosing spondylitis, 79.0% of the subjects in anti-TNF (+/-DMARD) group and 41.1% of the subjects in the DMARD group persisted with their treatments. The OR (95%CI) for therapy persistence was 1.50 (1.34-1.67) for the anti-TNF (+/-DMARD) group as compared with the DMARD group in the first year for the patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and 2.33 (1.74-3.11) for the patients with ankylosing spondylitis. A similar trend was observed at the end of the second year. CONCLUSIONS: A general trend of higher rates of therapy persistence with anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) was observed as compared to DMARD in the study period. We observed higher persistence rates for anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis as compared to rheumatoid arthritis; and a higher persistence for DMARD in patients with rheumatoid arthritis as compared to ankylosing spondylitis. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a persistência do tratamento em pacientes com artrite reumatoide e espondilite anquilosante que iniciaram terapia com medicamentos modificadores do curso da doença (MMCD) e agentes bloqueadores do fator de necrose tumoral (anti-TNF). MÉTODOS: Este estudo de coorte retrospectiva de julho de 2008 a setembro de 2013 avaliou a persistência na terapia, definida como o tempo do início até a descontinuação, permitindo-se um intervalo de até 30 dias entre o fim da prescrição e o início da prescrição seguinte. Odds ratio (OR) com intervalos de confiança de 95% (IC95%) foram calculados por meio de modelos de regressão logística para estimar a chance de apresentar persistência na terapia após o primeiro e os dois primeiros anos de seguimento. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 11.642 pacientes com artrite reumatoide - 2.241 iniciaram uso de agentes anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 9.401 iniciaram MMCD - e 1.251 pacientes com espondilite anquilosante - 976 iniciaram uso de agentes anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 275 iniciaram MMCD. No primeiro ano de acompanhamento, 63,5% persistiram em terapia com anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 54,1% em uso de MMCD do grupo com artrite reumatoide. Em relação à espondilite anquilosante, 79,0% do grupo anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 41,1% do grupo MMCD persistiram no tratamento. O OR (IC95%) para persistência na terapia foi de 1,50 (1,34-1,67) para o grupo anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) comparado com MMCD no primeiro ano em pacientes com artrite reumatoide, e de 2,33 (1,74-3,11) em pacientes com espondilite anquilosante. Foi observada tendência semelhante ao final do segundo ano. CONCLUSÕES: Observou-se uma tendência geral de taxas mais elevadas de persistência na terapia com anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) em relação a MMCD no período estudado. Foram observadas taxas de persistência mais elevadas para os usuários de anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) em pacientes com espondilite anquilosante em relação a artrite reumatoide, e maior persistência para MMCD em pacientes com artrite reumatoide em relação à espondilite anquilosante.

Hospitalization for musculoskeletal disorders in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients failing disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) may undergo anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor (anti-TNF) therapy. Using the Quebec health services administrative databases, we examined the rates of musculoskeletal (MSD)-related hospitalizations among RA patients receiving anti-TNF, DMARDs, and neither of those therapies (non-users). METHODS: Matched cohort analyses were performed separately in 2002-2006 and 2007-2011. In each cohort, DMARD and non-user groups were formed to 3-1 match the anti-TNF users on age, sex, date of RA diagnosis, high-dimensional propensity score and date of the first anti-TNF dispensation (index-date). Non-users did not use DMARDs or anti-TNF drugs during the year before the index-date and in the 90 days post, but used at least one of these medications in the study period. RESULTS: During 2002-2006, 557 anti-TNF users were matched to 1144 DMARD users and to 656 non-users, compared to 690, 1651, and 532 patients, respectively during 2007-2011. The crude rates of MSD-related hospitalizations in the anti-TNF, DMARD and non-users groups were respectively: 8.2/100, 6.4/100 and 10.5/100 patient-years in 2002-2006, and 6.9/100, 4.8/100, and 8.6/100 patient-years in 2007-2011. In multivariable Cox regression models, the hazard ratios of MSD-related hospitalizations (95 % confidence interval) were: 0.95 (0.60; 1.50) for anti-TNF and 0.69 (0.46; 1.02) for DMARD users, versus non-users in 2002-06, and 0.65 (0.37; 1.14) and 0.40 (0.24; 0.66), respectively in 2007-2011. CONCLUSION: The MSD-related hospitalization risk was lower in RA patients using DMARD therapy and similar in those using anti-TNF therapy with or without DMARDs as compared to those not using either of these therapies during the study period.

Treatment persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis / Persistência do tratamento em pacientes com artrite reumatoide e espondilite anquilosante

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To evaluate treatment persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis who started therapies with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and tumor necrosis factor blockers (anti-TNF drugs). METHODS This retrospective cohort study from July 2008 to September 2013 evaluated therapy persistence, which is defined as the period between the start of treatment until it is discontinued, allowing for an interval of up to 30 days between the prescription end and the start of the next prescription. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated by logistic regression models to estimate the patients' chances of persisting in their therapies after the first and after the two first years of follow-up. RESULTS The study included 11,642 patients with rheumatoid arthritis - 2,241 of these started on anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 9,401 patients started on DMARD - and 1,251 patients with ankylosing spondylitis - 976 of them were started on anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 275 were started on DMARD. In the first year of follow-up, 63.5% of the patients persisted in their therapies with anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) and 54.1% remained using DMARD in the group with rheumatoid arthritis. In regards to ankylosing spondylitis, 79.0% of the subjects in anti-TNF (+/-DMARD) group and 41.1% of the subjects in the DMARD group persisted with their treatments. The OR (95%CI) for therapy persistence was 1.50 (1.34-1.67) for the anti-TNF (+/-DMARD) group as compared with the DMARD group in the first year for the patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and 2.33 (1.74-3.11) for the patients with ankylosing spondylitis. A similar trend was observed at the end of the second year. CONCLUSIONS A general trend of higher rates of therapy persistence with anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) was observed as compared to DMARD in the study period. We observed higher persistence rates for anti-TNF drugs (+/-DMARD) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis as compared to rheumatoid arthritis; and a higher persistence for DMARD in patients with rheumatoid arthritis as compared to ankylosing spondylitis.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Avaliar a persistência do tratamento em pacientes com artrite reumatoide e espondilite anquilosante que iniciaram terapia com medicamentos modificadores do curso da doença (MMCD) e agentes bloqueadores do fator de necrose tumoral (anti-TNF). MÉTODOS Este estudo de coorte retrospectiva de julho de 2008 a setembro de 2013 avaliou a persistência na terapia, definida como o tempo do início até a descontinuação, permitindo-se um intervalo de até 30 dias entre o fim da prescrição e o início da prescrição seguinte. Odds ratio (OR) com intervalos de confiança de 95% (IC95%) foram calculados por meio de modelos de regressão logística para estimar a chance de apresentar persistência na terapia após o primeiro e os dois primeiros anos de seguimento. RESULTADOS Foram incluídos 11.642 pacientes com artrite reumatoide - 2.241 iniciaram uso de agentes anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 9.401 iniciaram MMCD - e 1.251 pacientes com espondilite anquilosante - 976 iniciaram uso de agentes anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 275 iniciaram MMCD. No primeiro ano de acompanhamento, 63,5% persistiram em terapia com anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 54,1% em uso de MMCD do grupo com artrite reumatoide. Em relação à espondilite anquilosante, 79,0% do grupo anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 41,1% do grupo MMCD persistiram no tratamento. O OR (IC95%) para persistência na terapia foi de 1,50 (1,34-1,67) para o grupo anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) comparado com MMCD no primeiro ano em pacientes com artrite reumatoide, e de 2,33 (1,74-3,11) em pacientes com espondilite anquilosante. Foi observada tendência semelhante ao final do segundo ano. CONCLUSÕES Observou-se uma tendência geral de taxas mais elevadas de persistência na terapia com anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) em relação a MMCD no período estudado. Foram observadas taxas de persistência mais elevadas para os usuários de anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) em pacientes com espondilite anquilosante em relação a artrite reumatoide, e maior persistência para MMCD em pacientes com artrite reumatoide em relação à espondilite anquilosante.

Análise farmacoepidemiológica e farmacoeconômica do tratamento da espondilite anquilosante com os bloqueadores do fator de necrose tumoral (TNF) / Análise farmacoepidemiológica e farmacoeconômica do tratamento da espondilite anquilosante com os bloqueadores do fator de necrose tumoral (TNF)

Introdução. A espondilite anquilosante (EA) é uma doença crônica, que afeta principalmente a coluna vertebral e é caracterizada por dor e inflamação na região lombar. No Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) estão disponíveis para o tratamento da EA, no Componente Especializado da Assistência Farmacêutica, os medicamentos modificadores do curso da doença (MMCD) e os bloqueadores do fator de necrose tumoral (TNF), entre eles infliximabe, etanercepte e adalimumabe. Os agentes anti-TNF são indicados quando o paciente persiste com atividade da doença por três meses após o tratamento convencional com anti-inflamatórios não esteroidais. O anti-TNF golimumabe não está incorporado ao SUS para a terapia da EA. Objetivos. Avaliar a eficácia, efetividade, segurança, custo e custo-utilidade do tratamento da EA com os agentes anti-TNF infliximabe, etanercepte, adalimumabe e golimumabe. Métodos. Foram realizadas uma revisão sistemática com metanálises de ensaios clínicos randomizados para avaliar eficácia e segurança e uma coorte prospectiva de 12 meses de seguimento para avaliar efetividade e segurança do tratamento da EA com os agentes anti-TNF. A eficácia e efetividade foram avaliadas por medidas de atividade da doença, funcionalidade e qualidade de vida. Foi estabelecida uma coorte histórica de 3,5 anos de seguimento de pacientes com EA em Minas Gerais com bases de dados administrativas do SUS. A partir dessa coorte, foram avaliados a persistência a terapia com agentes anti-TNF e MMCD e o gasto mediano mensal por individuo de acordo com o esquema de tratamento. Uma coorte histórica de âmbito nacional com bases administrativas do SUS de 8 anos de seguimento foi conduzida para avaliar o risco de hospitalização por infecção associado a exposição de anti-TNF e MMCD em pacientes com EA e artrite reumatoide (AR), considerando a exposição à terapia medicamentosa uma variável tempo-dependente. Foi realizada uma análise de custo-utilidade na perspectiva do SUS que compara o etanercepte e o golimumabe. O modelo de análise foi desenvolvido com horizonte temporal de 5 e 25 anos e desconto de 5% nos custos e benefícios. Foram considerados os custos médicos diretos e uma análise de sensibilidade foi conduzida para garantir a robustez dos resultados. Para todas as análises, adotou-se um nível de significância de 5%. A metanálise foi conduzida no Review Manager® 5.1, as análises estatísticas dos estudos observacionais foram realizadas utilizando-se SAS 9.4 e o modelo econômico foi realizado no TreeAge Pro 2014. Resultados. A revisão sistemática incluiu dezoito estudos e as metanálises mostraram que pacientes tratados com os agentes anti-TNF apresentaram maior chance de resposta ASAS 20 em 12/14 semanas (risco relativo RR 2,21; intervalo de confiança IC 95% 1,91; 2,56) e em 24 semanas (RR 2,68; IC 95% 2,06; 3,48) em relação ao grupo controle. As metanálises de segurança e perda de acompanhamento não mostraram resultados com significância estatística. No estudo prospectivo, foram incluídos 98 pacientes sendo que 64,9% deles tiveram boa resposta clínica em 6 meses de acompanhamento e 93 reações adversas foram relatadas. Na coorte histórica de Minas Gerais, foram analisados 1.251 pacientes com EA. No primeiro ano de acompanhamento, 79,0% do grupo anti-TNF (+/-MMCD) e 41,1% do grupo MMCD persistiram no tratamento. O custo mediano mensal foi de R$65 para MMCD e de R$4.314 para o tratamento com anti-TNF e, entre estes, o etanercepte apresentou menor custo. Na coorte histórica de âmbito nacional, 86.398 pacientes com EA e AR foram incluídos e a taxa da primeira hospitalização por infecção foi de 6,08, 7,62, 4,83 e 7,57 por 1000 pacientes-ano para não uso, exposição corrente de de MMCD, de anti-TNF e de anti-TNF+MMCD, respectivamente. O hazard ratio (HR) ajustado (IC 95%) foi de 1,27 (1,10; 1,47) para uso corrente de MMCD e de 0,85 (0,67; 1,09) para uso corrente de anti-TNF em comparação com não uso. O HR ajustado da combinação anti-TNF e MMCD comparado com o não uso foi de 1,36 (0,90; 2,05). No estudo de custo-utilidade, em 5 e 25 anos o golimumabe apresentou menor custo e menor efetividade comparado com o etanecerpte e a razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) foi R$311.341,41 e R$157.185,80 por anos de vida ajustados pela qualidade (AVAQ) em 5 e 25 anos, respetivamente. Conclusões. Os agentes anti-TNF são eficazes e efetivos na terapia da EA e estão associados a ocorrência de infecções e outras reações adversas. Entretanto, o risco de infecção grave associado a exposição com anti-TNF não diferiu da exposição não uso. Esses medicamentos contribuem expressivamente para o elevado gasto no tratamento da EA e a terapia com etanercepte apresentou menor custo por paciente comparado com adalimumabe e infliximabe. O golimumabe foi considerado uma alternativa custo-efetiva na perspectiva do SUS, entretanto esse resultado possui um certo grau de incerteza e estudos adicionais devem ser conduzidos antes da incorporação da tecnologia no SUS.

Introduction. Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic disease that primarily affects the spine and is characterized by inflammation and pain. In the Brazilian Health System (SUS) the disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers, including infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab, are available for the treatment of AS. The anti-TNF are recommended for patients with persistent disease activity despite therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories for three months. The anti-TNF agent golimumab is not incorporated into the SUS for AS therapy. Objectives. To assess the efficacy, effectiveness, safety, cost and cost-utility of the AS therapy with anti-TNF agents infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and golimumab. Methods. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials were performed to evaluate efficacy and safety and a 12-month follow-up prospective cohort was carried out to evaluate effectiveness and safety of AS therapy with anti-TNF agents. The efficacy and effectiveness was assessed by measures of disease activity, functionality and quality of life. A 3.5-year follow-up retrospective cohort of AS patients was conducted with data obtained from administrative databases of the SUS in Minas Gerais. The persistence on therapy with anti-TNF agents and DMARDs and the drug monthly cost per individual were estimated. A 8-year follow-up retrospective cohort with SUS administrative databases in Brazil was conducted to assess the risk of hospitalization for infections associated with anti-TNF therapy and DMARD exposure in patients with AS and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), considering drug exposure a time-dependent variable. The cost-utility analysis from the SUS perspective comparing etanercept and golimumab was perfomerd with 5 and 25-year time horizon and 5% discount on costs and benefits. Only direct medical costs were included and sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure the robustness of results. For all analyses a 5% significance level was adopted. The meta-analysis was conducted on Review Manager® 5.1, the statistical analyses of observational studies were performed on SAS 9.4 and the TreeAge Pro 2014 was used to run the economic model. Results. The systematic review included eighteen studies and the meta-analyses showed that patients treated with anti-TNF agents were more likely to achieve ASAS 20 response at 12/14 weeks (relative risk RR 2.21; confidence interval CI 95% 1.91; 2.56) and at 24 weeks (RR 2.68; CI 95% 2.06; 3.48) compared to control group. Meta-analyses of safety outcomes and withdraw showed non-statisticall results. The prospective study included 98 patients and 64.9% achieved good clinical response at 6 months of follow-up and 93 adverse reactions were reported. The retrospective cohort of Minas Gerais included 1,251 AS patients. At the first year of follow-up, 79.0% of the anti-TNF (+/-DMARD) group and 41.1% of DMARD-only group persisted on therapy. The monthly median cost was R$60 for DMARD therapy and R$3,956 for anti-TNF therapy. Among the anti-TNF agentes, etanercept had the lowest cost. The nationwide retrospective cohort included 86,398 patients with AS or RA and the rate of first hospitalization for infections was 6.08, 7.62, 4.83 and 7.57 per 1000 patient-years for non-user, DMARD, anti-TNF and anti-TNF+DMARD exposure, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) was 1.27 (1.10; 1.47) to current DMARD exposure and 0.85 (0.67; 1.09) to current anti TNF exposure compared with non-use exposure. The adjusted HR of current anti-TNF+DMARD exposure compared to the non-use exposure was 1.36 (0.90; 2.05). The cost-utility model indicated that at 5 and 25 years golimumab is less costly and less effective compared to etanercept and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was R$311,341.41 and R$157,185.80 per years of quality-adjusted life (QALY) in 5 and 25 years, respectively. Conclusions. The anti-TNF agents are effective in AS therapy and are associated with the occurrence of infections and other adverse reactions. However, the risk of serious infections associated to anti-TNF exposure did not differ from non-use. These drugs largely contribute to the high therapy cost of AS. The therapy with etanercept showed lower cost per patient compared to adalimumab and infliximab. Golimumab was considered a cost-effective alternative in the SUS perspective, however, this result shows considerable uncertainty and further studies should be conducted before the incorporation of this technology in the SUS. Keywords: ankylosing spondylitis, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker, cohort study, cost-effectiveness study, health technology assessment

Infliximabe, metotrexato e sua combinação no tratamento da artrite reumatoide: revisão sistemática e metanálise / Infliximab, methotrexate and their combination for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Foi feita uma revisão sistemática para avaliar a eficácia e a segurança do esquema infliximabe + metotrexato (IFX + MTX) versus MTX isoladamente ou em combinação com outros medicamentos modificadores do curso da doença (MMCD). Pesquisou‐se nas principais bases de dados eletrônicas e na literatura cinzenta e fez‐se uma busca manual. Dois revisores independentes fizeram a seleção, extração de dados e análise da qualidade dos estudos. A metanálise foi feita com o software Review Manager® 5.1. Incluíram‐se nove estudos. O escore médio na escala de Jadad modificada foi de 4,4, mas somente um estudo mostrou baixo risco de viés. O esquema IFX + MTX apresentou melhores respostas nos desfechos clínicos de ACR e do DAS28 por até 54 semanas e na progressão radiográfica por até 104 semanas. As perdas de seguimento decorrentes da falta de eficácia foram menores no grupo IFX + MTX. Não foi observada diferença estatisticamente significante nos eventos adversos. A combinação IFX + MTX é mais eficaz do que o tratamento com MTX isolado ou em combinação com MMCD. Esse esquema apresentou boa tolerabilidade em pacientes previamente tratados com MMCD, não tratados com MTX ou com respostas insuficientes ao MTX. A eficácia do regime IFX + MTX é observada principalmente durante os períodos iniciais do tratamento. Altas doses de IFX foram tão eficazes quanto a dose padrão, mas com a possibilidade maior risco de infecções graves. Recomenda‐se, portanto, que os médicos utilizem a dose padrão de IFX de 3 mg/kg a cada oito semanas.

We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of infliximab + methotrexate (IFX + MTX) regimens versus MTX alone or in combination with other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). We searched through major databases, the grey literature and did a manual search. Two independent reviewers conducted the selection, data extraction and analysis of the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager® 5.1 software. Nine trials were included. The mean modified Jadad score was 4.4, but only one study showed low risk of bias. IFX + MTX regimen presented better responses in clinical outcomes of ACR and DAS28 by up to 54 weeks, and of radiographic progression by up to 104 weeks. Withdrawals due to lack of efficacy was lower in the IFX + MTX group. No significant difference in adverse events was observed. The IFX + MTX combination is more effective than treatment with MTX alone or DMARDs combination. This regimen presented good tolerability in patients previously treated with DMARDs, not treated with MTX or with insufficient responses to MTX. The efficacy of IFX + MTX is noted primarily during initial periods of treatment. High doses of IFX were as effective as the standard dose, but with possible higher risk of serious infections. Therefore, we advise clinicians to use the standard dose of IFX 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks.

Infliximab, methotrexate and their combination for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of infliximab + methotrexate (IFX + MTX) regimens versus MTX alone or in combination with other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). We searched through major databases, the grey literature and did a manual search. Two independent reviewers conducted the selection, data extraction and analysis of the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager(®) 5.1 software. Nine trials were included. The mean modified Jadad score was 4.4, but only one study showed low risk of bias. IFX + MTX regimen presented better responses in clinical outcomes of ACR and DAS28 by up to 54 weeks, and of radiographic progression by up to 104 weeks. Withdrawals due to lack of efficacy was lower in the IFX + MTX group. No significant difference in adverse events was observed. The IFX + MTX combination is more effective than treatment with MTX alone or DMARDs combination. This regimen presented good tolerability in patients previously treated with DMARDs, not treated with MTX or with insufficient responses to MTX. The efficacy of IFX + MTX is noted primarily during initial periods of treatment. High doses of IFX were as effective as the standard dose, but with possible higher risk of serious infections. Therefore, we advise clinicians to use the standard dose of IFX 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks.

Rituximab for rheumatoid arthrits treatment: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by systemic joint inflammation that often leads to significant disability. Several effective anti-TNF agents have been used, but some patients have shown an inadequate response. Rituximab is a therapeutic monoclonal antibody indicated in such cases. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to access efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active RA which have or have not been treated with anti-TNF agents before, and to relate outcome with RF and anti-CCP serology. We searched major electronics databases, grey literature and searched for references manually. We used Review Manager(r)5.1 for meta-analysis. RESULTS: We included six RCTs comparing rituximab 1000 mg with placebo. Methotrexate was used by both groups. Treatment with rituximab was more effective in naïve and in anti-TNF treatment failure patients - ACR20/50/70 and EULAR response. We observed lower changes in Total Genant-modified Sharp score, erosion score and joint narrowing scores in the rituximab group, and SF-36, FACIT-T and HAQ-DI scores were also better in this group. There were no differences between groups regarding safety outcomes, with exception of acute injection reactions, which were more common on rituximab group. More RF/anti-CCP seropositive patients achieved ACR20 than RF/anti-CP negative patients in rituximab group. CONCLUSION: Available data support the use of rituximab for the treatment of RA, as it is an effective and safe option for naïve and anti-TNF treatment failure patients. RF and anti-CCP seam to influence treatment results, but this inference needs further research.

Rituximabe para o tratamento da artrite reumatoide: revisão sistemática / Rituximab for rheumatoid arthrits treatment: a systematic review

Introdução: A artrite reumatoide (AR) é uma doença autoimune crônica caracterizada por inflamação articular sistêmica que, com frequência, leva a significativa incapacitação. Vários agentes anti-TNF têm sido usados efetivamente, mas alguns pacientes demonstraram resposta inadequada. Rituximabe é um anticorpo monoclonal terapêutico indicado em tais casos. Métodos: Realizou-se uma revisão sistemática para avaliar a eficácia e a segurança de rituximabe em pacientes com AR ativa previamente tratados ou não com agentes anti-TNF e para relacionar o desfecho com a sorologia para FR e anti-CCP. Pesquisaram-se importantes bancos de dados eletrônicos e a literatura não convencional, além de se fazer uma busca manual de referências. Para a meta-análise, utilizou-se o programa Review Manager® 5.1. Resultados: Consideramos seis ERCs comparando rituximabe 1000 mg com placebo. Em ambos os grupos usou-se Metotrexato. O tratamento com rituximabe foi mais efetivo em pacientes jamais tratados e nos que não obtiveram sucesso com a terapia anti-TNF - critérios ACR 20/50/70 e EULAR. No grupo de rituximabe, observaram-se mudanças menos expressivas nos escores de Sharp/Genant, de erosão e de estreitamento do espaço articular; nesse grupo, os escores SF-36, FACIT-T e HAQ-DI também foram melhores. Não foram notadas diferenças entre grupos com relação aos desfechos de segurança, com exceção das reações agudas à infusão, que foram mais comuns no grupo de rituximabe. Ainda no grupo de rituximabe, um número maior de pacientes soropositivos para FR/anti-CCP alcançou ACR20, em comparação com pacientes negativos para RF/anti-CCP. Conclusão: Os dados disponíveis falam em favor do uso de rituximabe para o tratamento ...

Introduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by systemic joint inflammation that often leads to significant disability. Several effective anti-TNF agents have been used, but some patients have shown an inadequate response. Rituximab is a therapeutic monoclonal antibody indicated in such cases. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to access efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active RA which have or have not been treated with anti-TNF agents before, and to relate outcome with RF and anti-CCP serology. We searched major electronics databases, grey literature and searched for references manually. We used Review Manager(r)5.1 for meta-analysis. Results: We included six RCTs comparing rituximab 1000 mg with placebo. Methotrexate was used by both groups. Treatment with rituximab was more effective in naïve and in anti-TNF treatment failure patients - ACR20/50/70 and EULAR response. We observed lower changes in Total Genant-modified Sharp score, erosion score and joint narrowing scores in the rituximab group, and SF-36, FACIT-T and HAQ-DI scores were also better in this group. There were no differences between groups regarding safety outcomes, with exception of acute injection reactions, which were more common on rituximab group. More RF/anti-CCP seropositive patients achieved ACR20 than RF/anti-CP negative patients in rituximab group. Conclusion: Available data support the use of rituximab for the treatment of RA, as it is an effective and safe option for naïve and anti-TNF treatment failure patients. RF and anti-CCP seam to influence treatment results, but this inference needs further research. .

Adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Since the discovery of the role of tumor necrosis factor in the physiopathological process of rheumatoid arthritis, five drugs that block this cytokine have been used as therapeutic options. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. A search of relevant studies in Medline (through PubMed) and LILACS in June 2011 was carried out. Study selection, data collection and analysis were performed in pairs and independently by two reviewers and by a third reviewer in cases of disagreement. The meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager® 5.1 using the random effects model. Eleven articles related to adalimumab were included and considered nine studies with 3461 patients. Ten studies showed low risk of bias regarding the blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment. Patients who received the combination treatment of adalimumab and methotrexate showed better efficacy results and lower radiographic progression when compared to placebo + methotrexate in 24-104 weeks. Patients who received adalimumab as monotherapy showed better efficacy outcomes when compared to placebo in 24 and 26 weeks. The results of the meta-analyses of adverse events were not statistically significant, except for reactions at the injection site, which favored the control group. Adalimumab efficacy was demonstrated in monotherapy and when associated to a DMARD, but the evidence for combined use is more robust.

Adalimumabe no tratamento da artrite reumatoide: uma revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados / Adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Desde a descoberta do papel do fator de necrose tumoral no processo fisiopatológico da artrite reumatoide, cinco medicamentos bloqueadores dessa citocina têm sido empregados como opção terapêutica. Para avaliar a eficácia e a segurança do adalimumabe no tratamento da artrite reumatoide foi conduzida uma revisão sistemática com metanálise de ensaios clínicos controlados e randomizados. Foi realizada busca de estudos relevantes nas bases de dados Medline (via PubMed) e LILACS em junho de 2011. A seleção dos estudos, coleta e análise de dados foram realizadas de forma pareada e independente por dois revisores e por um terceiro revisor em casos de discordância. A metanálise foi conduzida no software Review Manager® 5.1 usando o modelo de efeitos aleatórios. Onze artigos referentes ao adalimumabe foram incluídos e contemplaram nove estudos com 3461 pacientes. Dez estudos mostraram baixo risco de viés quanto ao cegamento dos participantes e pessoal e cegamento de avaliação de resultados. Os pacientes que receberam tratamento da associação de adalimumabe e metotrexato apresentam melhores resultados de eficácia e menor progressão radiográfica quando comparados ao grupo placebo + metotrexato em 24 a 104 semanas. Os pacientes que utilizaram adalimumabe em monoterapia apresentaram melhores resultados de eficácia em relação ao placebo em 24 e 26 semanas. Os resultados das metanálises de eventos adversos não foram estatisticamente significantes, exceto para reações no local de aplicação, na qual favoreceu o grupo controle. A eficácia do adalimumabe foi demonstrada em monoterapia e associado a algum MMCD, porém as evidências para o uso combinado são mais robustas.

Since the discovery of the role of tumor necrosis factor in the physiopathological process of rheumatoid arthritis, five drugs that block this cytokine have been used as therapeutic options. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. A search of relevant studies in Medline (through PubMed) and LILACS in June 2011 was carried out. Study selection, data collection and analysis were performed in pairs and independently by two reviewers and by a third reviewer in cases of disagreement. The meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager® 5.1 using the random effects model. Eleven articles related to adalimumab were included and considered nine studies with 3461 patients. Ten studies showed low risk of bias regarding the blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment. Patients who received the combination treatment of adalimumab and methotrexate showed better efficacy results and lower radiographic progression when compared to placebo + methotrexate in 24-104 weeks. Patients who received adalimumab as monotherapy showed better efficacy outcomes when compared to placebo in 24 and 26 weeks. The results of the meta-analyses of adverse events were not statistically significant, except for reactions at the injection site, which favored the control group. Adalimumab efficacy was demonstrated in monotherapy and when associated to a DMARD, but the evidence for combined use is more robust.

Treatment of ankylosing spondylitis with TNF blockers: a meta-analysis.

Biological agents directed against tumor necrosis factor (TNF) represent therapeutic options for patients with ankylosing spondylitis with high disease activity despite use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anti-TNF agents infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, and certolizumab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis, we performed a systematic review of randomized clinical trials on adult patients with ankylosing spondylitis using articles culled from the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and LILACS databases (September/2012), manual literature search, and the gray literature. Study selections and data collection were performed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements solved by a third reviewer. The following outcomes were evaluated: ASAS 20 response, disease activity, physical function, vertebral mobility, adverse events, and withdraws. The meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager(®) 5.1 software by applying the random effects model. Eighteen studies were included in this review. No study of certolizumab was included. Patients treated with anti-TNF agents were more likely to display an ASAS 20 response after 12/14 weeks (RR 2.21; 95 % CI 1.91; 2.56) and 24 weeks (RR 2.68; 95 % CI 2.06; 3.48) compared with controls, which was also true for several other efficacy outcomes. Meta-analysis of safety outcomes and withdraws did not indicate statistically significant differences between treatment and control groups after 12 or 30 weeks. Adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, and golimumab can effectively reduce the signs and symptoms of the axial component of ankylosing spondylitis. Safety outcomes deserve further study, especially with respect to long-term follow-ups.

[Doctors, lawyers and pharmaceutical industry on health lawsuits in Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil]. / Médicos, advogados e indústria farmacêutica na judicialização da saúde em Minas Gerais, Brasil.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the relationship between the prescribing doctor, lawyer and pharmaceutical industry in lawsuits against the state. METHODS: Retrospective descriptive study based on data from administrative files, relating to lawsuits involving medicine demands, in the state of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, from October 1999 to October 2009. RESULTS: A total of 2,412 lawsuits were analyzed with 2,880 medicine requests, including 18 different drugs, 12 of them provided through Pharmaceutical Policies of the Brazilian National Health System (SUS). The most frequent medicines requested included were adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, insulin glargine and tiotropium bromide. The main diseases were rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Private lawyers and doctors were predominant. The results revealed the association between doctors and law offices on drug requests. Among the lawsuits filed by the office A, 43.6% had a single prescriber to adalimumab, while 29 doctors were responsible for 40.2% of the same drug prescriptions. A single doctor was responsible for 16.5% of the adalimumab prescriptions, being requested through lawsuits filed by a single private law office in 44.8% of legal proceedings. CONCLUSIONS: A greater representation of doctors and lawyers from the private sector can hinder equity in health. The results revealed the association between doctors and law offices on drug requests. This is an indication that justice and medical practice have been used, at certain times, to serve the interests of the pharmaceutical industry.

Médicos, advogados e indústria farmacêutica na judicialização da saúde em Minas Gerais, Brasil / Doctors, lawyers and pharmaceutical industry on health lawsuits in Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil / Médicos, abogados e industria farmacéutica en la judicialización de la salud en Minas Gerais, Sudeste de Brasil

OBJETIVO: Descrever as relações entre médico prescritor, advogado e indústria farmacêutica em ações judiciais contra o Estado. MÉTODOS: Estudo descritivo retrospectivo com base nas informações dos expedientes administrativos dos processos judiciais com demandas por medicamentos contra o Estado de Minas Gerais movidos entre outubro de 1999 e outubro de 2009. As variáveis estudadas foram: sexo, idade e doença dos beneficiários das ações, origem do atendimento médico (público ou privado), médico prescritor, tipo de representação jurídica e medicamento solicitado. Foi realizada análise descritiva das variáveis com a distribuição de frequências. RESULTADOS: Foram analisadas 2.412 ações judiciais referentes a 2.880 medicamentos solicitados, com 18 fármacos diferentes. Entre esses, 12 são fornecidos pelas políticas de assistência farmacêutica do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). Os medicamentos mais solicitados foram adalimumabe, etanercepte, infliximabe e insulina glargina. As principais doenças dos beneficiários foram artrite reumatóide, espondilite anquilosante, diabetes mellitus e doenças pulmonares obstrutivas crônicas. Houve predomínio de representação por advogados particulares e atendimento por médicos do setor privado. Entre as ações representadas pelo escritório A, 43,6% tiveram um único médico prescritor para o adalimumabe e 29 médicos foram responsáveis por 40,2% dos pedidos do mesmo fármaco. Apenas um médico foi responsável por 16,5% das prescrições de adalimumabe, solicitado por apenas um escritório particular de advocacia, em 44,8% dos pedidos. CONCLUSÕES: A maior representatividade de médicos do setor privado e advogados particulares pode trazer prejuízo à equidade. Os dados sugerem associação entre médicos e escritórios de advocacia nas solicitações dos medicamentos. Esse quadro é um indício de que a Justiça e a medicina têm sido utilizadas para atender aos interesses da indústria farmacêutica.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the relationship between the prescribing doctor, lawyer and pharmaceutical industry in lawsuits against the state. METHODS: Retrospective descriptive study based on data from administrative files, relating to lawsuits involving medicine demands, in the state of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, from October 1999 to October 2009. RESULTS: A total of 2,412 lawsuits were analyzed with 2,880 medicine requests, including 18 different drugs, 12 of them provided through Pharmaceutical Policies of the Brazilian National Health System (SUS). The most frequent medicines requested included were adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, insulin glargine and tiotropium bromide. The main diseases were rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Private lawyers and doctors were predominant. The results revealed the association between doctors and law offices on drug requests. Among the lawsuits filed by the office A, 43.6% had a single prescriber to adalimumab, while 29 doctors were responsible for 40.2% of the same drug prescriptions. A single doctor was responsible for 16.5% of the adalimumab prescriptions, being requested through lawsuits filed by a single private law office in 44.8% of legal proceedings. CONCLUSIONS: A greater representation of doctors and lawyers from the private sector can hinder equity in health. The results revealed the association between doctors and law offices on drug requests. This is an indication that justice and medical practice have been used, at certain times, to serve the interests of the pharmaceutical industry.

OBJETIVO: Describir las relaciones entre médico prescriptor, abogado e industria farmacéutica en acciones judiciales contra el Estado. MÉTODOS: Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo con base en las informaciones de los expedientes administrativos de los procesos judiciales con demandas por medicamentos contra el Estado de Minas Gerais, Sudeste de Brasil, movidos entre octubre de 1999 y octubre de 2009. Las variables estudiadas fueron: sexo, edad y enfermedad de los beneficiarios de las acciones, origen de la atención médica (público o privado), médico prescriptor, tipo de representación jurídica y medicamento solicitado. Se realizó análisis descriptivo de las variables con la distribución de frecuencias. RESULTADOS: Los medicamentos más solicitados fueron adalimumabe, etanercepte, infliximabe e insulina glargina. Las principales enfermedades de los beneficiarios fueron artritis reumatoide, espondilitis anquilosante, diabetes mellitus y enfermedades pulmonares obstructivas crónicas. Hubo predominio de representación por abogados particulares y atención por médicos del sector privado. Entre las acciones representadas por la oficina A, 43,6% tuvieron un único médico prescriptor para el adalimumabe, y 29 médicos fueron responsables por 40,2% de los pedidos del mismo fármaco. Sólo un médico fue responsable por 16,5% de las prescripciones de adalimumabe, solicitado por sólo una oficina particular de abogacía, en 44,8% de los pedidos. CONCLUSIONES: La mayor representatividad de médicos del sector privado y abogados particulares pudo traer perjuicio a la equidad. Los datos sugieren asociación entre médicos y oficinas de abogacía en las solicitudes de medicamentos. Este escenario es un indicio de que la justicia y la medicina han sido utilizadas para atender a los intereses de la industria farmacéutica.